President Obama has said in a couple speeches that Korea is sending automobiles into the United States but that Korea will not let the United States send automobiles to Korea. This isn't right. Why should Korea continue to make money on the American poeple and not buy our products? Can't Obama just stop Korea from sending Hyundais and Kias to the United States until they start importing some of our GM Ford and Chrysler products. Come on, fair is fair. The next time you are out driving around, just look and see how many Hyundais and Kias you see. If we could get rid of all the foreign cars in the USA, we would have so many jobs we wouldn't have enough unemployed workers to fill them.
Larry Lumsden, Gilbert
sockratties posted at 11:18 pm on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
NBTT… No, I don’t wonder, I remember.
After WWII, just like with Germany, we decided to build a trading partner and ally reducing the likelihood that they would again become enemy states. It has worked so far. Their ability to compete industrially actually helps keep us honest. Look at the improvement in American Vehicles over the last 15 years. If it weren’t for competition the big three would still be dictating your choice of car.
We have lopsided trade agreements because of geopolitical considerations. If Korea isn’t successful we can’t restrain North Korea and if Taiwan isn’t successful, we can’t restrain China’s rivalry. We have a trade deficit with China because they don’t need the kind of stuff we make. We sell them what they want to buy from us, like corn and grains but our own use of these commodities drives the price up and they often buy elsewhere. A good example is the use of corn for biofuel drives the cost of US corn higher than corn from South America.
Consider that the median American family income is more than 4X that of a Chinese household. That means we buy four times as much stuff. And China makes most of the stuff they need. China only needs to import food and oil, and we compete with them to buy oil.
NothingButTheTruth posted at 8:20 pm on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
Whether it's cars or whatever, it's obvious that we have a continual trade deficit with just about the entire world. No good reason for it that I can see, so why do we allow it? Would it be a trade war if we just demanded fairness and equity? Would a trade war with China hurt us at all if they just stopped sending all their cheap ineffective junk to America? I think I understand the spirit of this letter even if it does sound misguided somewhat. sockratties, doesn't the Japanese car dilemma make you wonder why we rebuilt Japan after WW2?
sockratties posted at 1:40 pm on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
I think this is about foreign car imports. Fair is driven by the market and the forces of supply and demand is what got us where we are today.
Let’s not forget why foreign cars got the foothold they have in the first place.
The big three, in the 70s, were pretty much the only game in town. European manufacturers had a shot at importing but because of poor quality and poor aftermarket support, cars like Fiat and Jaguar (and the Yugo that contributed to the savings and loan failure because much of the speculative money was invested in the Yugo venture) they were largely unsuccessful.
GM, Ford and Chrysler dictated what cars would be offered, what quality would be available, and what they would cost. The American consumer had a take it or leave it choice. Then along came Honda, Toyota, Mazda and other Japanese offerings. These cars were reliable, competitively priced and dealers supported aftermarket needs. The American big three lost out unless the customer wanted an unreliable care that was lucky to endure a 100,000 miles. Japanese cars found a public that wanted what they could provide. If Japanese cars had not filled the bill, they would have gone the way of the English, French and Italian cars.
GM, Ford and Chrysler were building cars in outdated, labor intensive facilities that couldn’t compete with the new automated Japanese factories in either cost or manufacturing tolerances. The big three were slow to upgrade and only planned as far ahead as the next fiscal quarter’s bottom line. Their answer to the smaller more reliable car for Americans was Toyota, Suzuki, and Mitsubishi cars, rebadged with American names. During Lee Iacocca’s reign as Chrysler’s CEO, Chrysler was the largest importer of foreign cars to the U.S. Meanwhile, Lee was telling everyone to “buy American.”
Today Korea has even newer facilities and better robots. They are giving Japan a run for their money. The next wave of cars will probably come from China who first must meet the needs of their growing middle class. India will also eventually be in the game.
American manufacturers do a lot of business in both Asia and Europe. The Ford Focus is a good example of a successful American car sold in Europe. They are also manufactured there. The only benefit Americans have from Fords being sold in Europe is if they are shareholders. Even the parts are of foreign manufacture.
Japanese and Korean manufacturing plants in the U. S. are really assembly plants. All major parts of the vehicles are manufactured abroad and shipped here as assemblies. Some of the foreign brands do, however, have as great a percentage of American manufactured components as do cars made in America by the big three.
If the big three had produced a product that other countries wanted and invested in the future of their companies they would be supplying cars to a waiting world and wouldn't have needed the bailouts (again) that we all provided.
Dale Whiting posted at 12:51 pm on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
Ditto on Accuracy!
Rodini,
In case you did not notice, this letter to the editor was written by Larry and addressed the topic of balance of trade with Korea in the new car market. Lecturing us on Republicans is not appropriate. I can sympathize with what you say, but not were you say it.
What ideas do you have on Korean trade balance? None! Then shut up!
Accuracy posted at 12:29 pm on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
Rodini posted: "Regardless, it’s an important article about the nation’s most pressing crisis. Take the time to read it..."
Evidently, Rodini did not take the time to read it . . . Because it has nothing in it about foreign car imports, or autos from South Korea.
Accuracy posted at 10:28 am on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
“Fair isn't fair with foreign cars”
When it comes to fair trade agreement, South Korea plays by its own rules, and its auto market rules only . . . Like, shipping 476,833 autos to the United States and allowing the U.S. to export just 5,878 autos to South Korea.
In all, Korea's total auto shipments to the United States jumped from $8.3 billion in 2009 to $11.73 billion trade surplus in autos last year. While the Asian nation opened its market (to America’s Big Three automakers) so that the U.S. could export only $492 million worth of autos to South Korean last year.
Obama keeps on recommending the revival of American Auto Industry, while continuing another trade pact with/by South Korea.
Dale Whiting posted at 10:08 am on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
Larry,
wdbnas knows what he is talking about. GM is not willing to manufacture in Korea. The potential market is too small. If you wish to throw stones, you need to move out of that glass house of your!
wdgnas posted at 6:15 am on Sat, Aug 13, 2011.
i am sure that 6 of the 7 representatives, both senators and the governor of alabama (where there is a hyundai manufacturing facility) and 8 of the 13 representatives, both senators and the governor of georgia (where there is a kia manufacturing facility would go for this idea in a heartbeat.